When Tucker Carlson thought Iran's regime should be 'annihilated'

Anchor Tucker Carlson went from being one of the most influential journalists in American conservatism to one of the most controversial, with no holds barred. For years, from his former foxhole at Fox News, Carlson set the agenda of the American right through clear and largely sensible criticism against the Democratic Party, different federal agencies, and even Republican 'neocons.' However, in recent years, Carlson's figure deteriorated exponentially in the conservative world, especially for his stance on foreign policy.

On Tuesday, Carlson once again got the discussion on social networks and the U.S. right-wing world revolving around his figure after sharing a clip of an interview conducted with Senator Ted Cruz (R-TX), where the journalist and the congressman can be seen arguing inordinately about Iran. Basically, Carlson accused Cruz of knowing little to nothing about Iran after asking him about the exact population and predominant ethnicity of the Iranian country. The Republican senator, on the other hand, took aim at Carlson for, he said, denying that the ayatollah is leading an assassination plot against President Donald Trump. Both raised the tone and showed the great distances between Carlson and part of the Republican wing of Congress.

However, despite the viralization of the interview, Carlson's stance surprised no one. For quite some time now, the presenter has made it clear in his monologues that he considers that the United States lost the moral authority to intervene in the internal affairs of other countries. In particular, the presenter attacks what he considers a 'warmongering' political elite. This stance, which is shared by much of the MAGA world and many U.S. conservatives and libertarians, has also earned him the moniker of being one of the most appeasing journalists to regimes hostile to Washington, including the Russian regime of Vladimir Putin and the Iranian theocracy. This perception has been growing more and more, especially after Carlson's trips to Russia and his repeated criticism of Republicans seeking to sanction and attack the Iranian regime.

The curious thing about Carlson's current stance on Iran is that, thirteen years ago, his views were diametrically opposed.

If Carlson now says the U.S. Intelligence Community is lying through its teeth about Iran and calls on Washington not to intervene against Tehran, in 2012 the Fox News host was literally calling for the "annihilation" of the country, a stance that earned him harsh criticism at the time.

"I think we are the only country with the moral authority […] sufficient to do that. [The U.S. is] the only country that doesn’t seek hegemony in the world. I do think, and I’m sure I’m the lone voice in saying this, that Iran deserves to be annihilated. I think they’re lunatics. I think they’re evil," Tucker Carlson said in 2012.

Later, Carlson qualified his words in a conversation with journalist Glenn Greenwald, explaining that he was not in favor of the annihilation of Iran as a country, but rather the overthrow of the Iranian regime.

"It's my fault that I got tongue-tied and didn't explain myself well last night. I'm actually on the opposite side on the Iran question from many people I otherwise agree with. I think attacking could be a disaster for the US and am worried that Obama will do it for fear of seeming weak before an election. Of course the Iranian government is awful and deserves to be crushed. But I'm not persuaded we or Israel could do it in a way that doesn't cause even greater problems. That's the main lesson of Iraq, it seems to me," Carlson said.

Long gone is the Carlson who harshly criticized and openly called for the overthrow of the Iranian regime. Now, on the contrary, the presenter even let go of Trump, for whom he campaigned, because of his support for Israel in its crusade with Iran.

According to Carlson, President Trump abandoned the values of 'America First' by supporting Israel in its military campaign against the Iranian regime.

Indeed, the conservative journalist accused the United States of being "complicit in an act of war" and argued that "politicians purporting to be America First can’t now credibly turn around and say they had nothing to do with it."

This criticism forced a response from Trump, who first stated that he was unaware of Carlson's questioning and adopted a diplomatic tone: "For those people who say they want peace—you can’t have peace if Iran has a nuclear weapon. So for all of those wonderful people who don’t want to do anything about Iran having a nuclear weapon—that’s not peace."

Then, Trump blasted Carlson on his Truth Social network: "Somebody please explain to kooky Tucker Carlson that IRAN CAN NOT HAVE A NUCLEAR WEAPON!"

The open confrontation between Tucker Carlson, Trump, and the Republicans is generating a new paradigm at the heart of the MAGA movement, whose undisputed leader is Trump himself but which was long unequivocally supported by the most influential conservative voices, including Carlson himself, who is now fighting to maintain a relevance and respect that is now more than challenged.